Coaches’ Move an Uninspiring Turn of Events in Lockout

Although it’s not entirely surprising, an interesting development has emerged on the legal front in the lockout lawsuit, Brady, et al v. NFL. The Coaches ssociation has filed an amicus brief in support of the player’s argument in favor of ending the lockout. For those not of the legal persuasion, and for those not bored to tears by legal explanations, an amicus curiae is a filing by an interested party who does not have a direct stake in the matter. It’s common practice (especially at the federal appellate level) for non parties to weigh in when a decision of the court might have a positive or negative impact on their rights.

Although no coach was specifically mentioned, the brief goes into some detail about how a continued lockout will not only irreparably harm the players and their ability to make a living, but also irreparably harm the coaches who have been robbed of much needed prep time with their teams. This is especially true of the new coaches who will now be behind a rather large eight ball once football operations resume. In their brief, the Coaches opined the following sentiments as it relates to the lockout:

“To meet management’s expectations, coaches need adequate time in the offseason to prepare their players for the season ahead…The lockout has already interfered with the coaches’ offseason plans for their players, and each day lost in preparing for the season further diminishes coaches’ opportunities to prove themselves and advance their career…”

I doubt it will be the back breaking development we’ve all been waiting for, but it’s certainly interesting that in a three party system it’s now two against one.